Respondent: Third party refused permission to part with information - CIC: Copies of lease deeds between the bank & landlord contained his personal information & is kept by the public authority as a trust with them; rejection u/s 8(1)(e) & 8(1)(j) upheld
22 Mar, 2015ORDER
1. The appellant, Shri C B Sajjan Shettar, submitted RTI application dated September 7, 2013 before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), State Bank of Mysore, Bengluru seeking copy of rent agreement with the landlord of the building where the R T Nagar branch office is housed, period of the lease, details of rent paid to the premises no. 531,II Block R T Nagar Branch and copy of the lease agreement with the landlord of the premises no. 530,II Block, R T Nagar where the bank has opened a ATM through a total of 3 points.
2. Vide reply dated 17 September 2013, the CPIO denied the information on the ground that the information sought falls under the exemptions provided u/s 8(1)(j) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. RTI Act, 2005and it had no relationship to any public activity therefore information sought could not be furnished. Not satisfied with the decision of CPIO, the appellant preferred an appeal dated 24 September 2013 to the first appellate authority (FAA) seeking information. Vide order dated 21 October 2013, the FAA directed the CPIO to seek the views of the third party, i.e. the landlord and dispose of the application after considering the same.
3. Dissatisfied with the response of the public authority, the appellant preferred appeal before the Commission.
4. The matter was heard by the Commission. The appellant submitted that the denial of the requisite information was not correct as the documents sought for by him are public documents and the endorsement given by the respondents in this regard should be set aside. He stated that he had not been given proper information. The respondents submitted that the application was rejected u/s 8(1)(e) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; and 8(1)(j) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. of the RTI Act, 2005 as it was third party information kept by them in fiduciary capacity. They informed the Commission that they also wrote letter to third party seeking permission to part with information but the third party(Landlord) refused to part with the information and intimated so vide letter dated 5.11.2013. The respondents further added that the appellant could not establish any larger public interest in the matter.
5. The Commission accepts the submissions of the respondents that the information sought for, i.e. copies of the lease deeds/agreements between the bank and the landlord contained personal information of the landlord and is kept by the public authority as a trust with them and hence cannot be provided. The appellant did not establish any larger public interest. The Commission upholds the decision of the respondents. The appeal is disposed of.
(Manjula Prasher)
Information Commissioner
Citation: Shri C B Sajjan Shettar v. State Bank of Mysore in Appeal: No. CIC/MP/A/2014/000477